The Mainstream Media Queers Marriage

Since Watergate, establishment American journalists have taken as their first commandment, Marx’ eleventh and last thesis on Feuerbach: “Philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways, but the point is to change it.”

Marx was calling for revolutionary action. Today’s pampered, pc journalists engage instead in radical misrepresentation, act as mouthpieces for their revolutionary allies, and silence their opponents. And so it is, with radical homosexuals’ attempt to destroy, or as they would say, “transform,” civilization through its most fundamental institution, marriage. And the mainstream media have signed on to the program.

On Thursday, February 26, WNBC-TV’s 11 p.m. news devoted a long story (maybe three minutes, instead of the usual 20 seconds) to Rosie O’Donnell’s so-called wedding in San Francisco. Co-anchor Sue Simmons said that O’Donnell had “tied the knot” with her “longtime partner,” Kelli Carpenter. O’Donnell and Carpenter were shown at the illegal ceremony in San Francisco, and we got to hear O’Donnell say that “We were inspired to come here by the sitting president and the vile and vicious and hateful comments he made.”

1. The “marriage ceremony” violated California state law; or
2. That O’Donnell was lying about President Bush.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom first broke the law on February 12, when he illegally ordered city officials to “marry” men to men, and women to women. (As of this writing, Newsom is culpable for over 3,400 counts of violating California law.) Pres. George W. Bush gave his speech in support of a Federal Marriage Amendment on February 24. It was Bush who responded to Newsom’s (and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s) rape of the law, and who did so without rancor. And yet, the media have repeatedly quoted “marrying” gays as saying that they were reacting to George W. Bush, without letting the facts get in the way.

Like the WNBC story, last Friday’s New York Daily News front page story on the O’Donnell “wedding” could have been written by any of the many homosexual organizations which have long sought to ram gay “marriage” down Americans’ throats. Nowhere in a story that covered almost an entire page, half of it a huge photograph of Mr. O’Donnell and his bride kissing, did reporters Mary Pappenfus and Dave Goldiner mention that same-sex marriage is illegal in California.

The front page headline read, “ROSIE TAKES A BRIDE Says ‘I do’ with Kelli in Frisco.” The huge, boldfaced headline on page five, where the story continued, was “ROSIE TELLS BUSH: NUPS TO YOU!”

Given Pappenfus and Goldiner’s refusal to mention that little matter of the law, two of their paragraphs seem a bit odd:

“More than 3,300 gay and lesbian couples have gotten hitched over the past two weeks, since new San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s defiant decision to allow same-sex nuptials.”

“Gay marriage opponents are hoping to get the courts to order a stop to the same-sex weddings and California Attorney General Bill Lockyer will ask for a ruling today whether city authorities are violating the law.”

What law? Pappenfus and Goldiner write as though same-sex marriage were the most normal thing on the face of the Earth, which a lunatic fringe of perverts – “gay marriage opponents” – seeks to desecrate.

“Angered by President Bush’s crusade to make it illegal for them to marry, Rosie O’Donnell and her lesbian partner, Kelli Carpenter, joined the rush down the aisle in San Francisco yesterday….

I always thought people got married for love. Apparently O’Donnell did so out of her hatred for George W. Bush. (I’m not counting O’Donnell’s submissive “wife,” Carpenter, who seems not to have a will of her own.)

“In tying the knot, the country’s most famous lesbian couple took center stage in the debate over gay marriage sparked by Bush’s call Tuesday for a constitutional amendment banning it.”

Apparently, there was a national consensus that homosexuals have the right to marry members of the same sex (since 1776?), until that “mean-spirited” George W. Bush went and sparked a debate. Note too, the President’s “crusade to make it illegal for them to marry …” So, it must have previously been legal for homosexuals to marry each other. Got it?

“’We really did it, we got married,’ O’Donnell said. ‘This is my brand new wife….’

“O’Donnell made it clear that it was her anger at Bush, as much as her love for Carpenter, that prompted her to board a plane for the West Coast. ‘One thought ran through my mind on the plane out here – with liberty and justice for all,’ O’Donnell said.”

This from a woman who pays armed bodyguards to accompany her everywhere, while she does everything in her considerable power to disenfranchise non-millionaires from enjoying their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

But what can you expect from a mainstream media that was queered years ago? When it comes to coverage of homosexuals, as with Islamists, you couldn’t trust mainstream “reporters” to give you the correct time of day. If it weren’t for that grand old scourge of the socialist media, Accuracy in Media founder Reed Irvine, we wouldn’t know, that according to New York Timesman Richard Berke (who is now the paper’s Washington editor), 75 percent of the top honchos at the Times on the editorial side were gay … and that was in 2000! And as William McGowan painstakingly shows in his book-length expose, Coloring the News: How Crusading for Diversity Has Corrupted American Journalism, the mainstream media flood the zone with stories in which gays are portrayed either as victims or heroes, while “killing” unflattering stories about them. (The New York Times refused to review Coloring the News.)

The queered media has graduated to foisting hoaxes on the public, in which “journalists” lie about popular, heterosexual athletes, such as Sandy Koufax and Mike Piazza, claiming they are homosexuals, in order to mainstream homosexuality.

(A critic might point to the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandal as an instance of negative coverage of homosexuals. If only it were so! Instead of telling the story of the thirty-year takeover of Catholic seminaries by activist, heterophobic, promiscuous homosexuals who harassed and ran off heterosexual seminarians, and who in all too many cases later inflicted themselves on young boys, the media presented gay, anti-church religious who have undermined the Church as heroes, denied the gay-sex abuse connection, and made the story one about the “evil” Catholic Church! Had the Church really been so “intolerant” and “homophobic,” the homosexual child sex abuse scandal would never have occurred. An excess of tolerance toward gays proved the Church’s undoing. Michael S. Rose has told this story, in his book, Goodbye! Good Men, which, however, has been greeted by mainstream media silence.)

Moving right along, Jason West, the radical Green Party mayor of the New York State college town, New Paltz, decided to make the town San Francisco East. West began illegally “marrying” same-sex couples on February 27. Following state law, the New Paltz town clerk refused to grant the couples marriage licenses, Ulster County District Attorney Donald Williams Jr. said he’d warned West that the ceremonies would be illegal, and the state health department announced that such marriages would violate state domestic relations law. West, who apparently has no interest in legally marrying heterosexual couples, performed the illegal weddings anyway, claiming, with a straight face, "I broke no law. I abided by the constitution of New York State and my oath of office."

The faux nuptials were played and replayed ‘round the clock Saturday, on New York City’s all-news cable TV station, NY1, with the screen identifying each “just-married” interviewee as a “newlywed.”

The New York Post is the only major media outlet I am aware of, to write “marries” in scare quotes.

Newsday, the radical leftwing daily that for over thirty years has dominated the Long Island market, claimed that “legal experts” insisted the “marriages” West performed may be legal.

After Mayor West’s little publicity stunt was over, at least for the moment, Newsday “reporter,”

Sumathi Reddy gave him the same sort of obsequious treatment in the March 1 edition that Rosie O’Donnell received from the mainstream media.

“Jason West, 26, a house painter who made headlines last year as the state's first elected Green Party mayor, is in disbelief.

”He's amazed that his decision to perform same-sex marriages Friday drew a media blitz. He's amazed that the village has been bombarded with couples eager to be married here. Perhaps most, he's amazed that his actions have so quickly caught attention at the state level, making it difficult for the reluctant State Legislature to ignore the divisive issue and provoking a public clash between two of the state's top officials - Republican Gov. George Pataki and State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat with his eye on the governor's seat in 2006.”

Gimme a break! You’d think Reddy were auditioning to run West’s next election campaign.

(On Tuesday, Ulster County District Attorney Williams charged Mayor West with 19 counts of illegally “solemnizing a wedding without a license,” a misdemeanor for which Williams does not seek to jail West. Openly gay New York State Senator Tom Duane of Manhattan immediately demanded that Williams be jailed and prosecuted: “Really, the Ulster County D.A. should be prosecuted for malicious prosecution, which is a felony in New York.”

WCBS-TV reporter Hazel Sanchez covered the charges against West, but did not mention Duane. We’ll have to see how much play Tom Duane’s demand gets in the media.)

I’ll have to leave for another time, the story of how the New York Times flooded the zone, beginning in November, with pro-gay marriage articles in both its op-ed and “news” pages.

The scorched-earth campaign on behalf of gay marriage by America’s pc, corporate media, has only led to greater opposition among the public to the illegal practice. And yet, America’s media elite are not interested in what most Americans think or do, however, but only in giving them their marching orders.

I don’t know whether the media’s support of the gay war on marriage will succeed. But this much I predict: After this latest episode, the elite media will find their audience and profits yet again diminished, as ever more disgusted Americans seek out more reliable, alternative media.

Gay Marriage Ruled Illegal in New York

Posted on 03/03/2004 9:38:57 AM PST by AntiGuv

ALBANY, N.Y. - New York's attorney general said Wednesday that same-sex weddings are prohibited under current law, throwing a potential hurdle into the plans of two mayors to preside over gay nuptials.

Meanwhile, across the country in Oregon, gay couples lined up for a sudden chance to wed after a county commissioner there said she would begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

In a statement obtained by The Associated Press, New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said he would leave it to the courts to decide if state law prohibiting same-sex marriage is constitutional.

"I personally would like to see the law changed, but must respect the law as it now stands," Eliot Spitzer said in a statement obtained by The Associated Press.

Spitzer said New York's law contains references to "bride and groom" and "husband and wife" and does not authorize same-sex marriage.

Both sides of the polarizing issue have been waiting for Spitzer's opinion since last Friday when the mayor of New Paltz, a small college town 75 miles north of Manhattan, married 25 same-sex couples. Village Mayor Jason West now faces 19 criminal counts and could face jail time.

On Wednesday, Nyack Mayor John Shields said he would also start marrying gay couples and planned to seek a license himself to marry his same-sex partner.

Shields told The Associated Press he will start officiating at weddings of same-sex couples as early as this week and planned to join other gay New Yorkers in visiting municipal clerks' offices Friday seeking marriage licenses.

(Last week, Spitzer refused to do his job, preferring to pawn off his repsonsibility on the courts. That was before Ulster County DA Donald Williams Jr. stepped up to the plate. See what a difference one courageous public official can make?)

This one is definitely a keeper. He's hit the "nail on the head" with respect to the pro-Gay bias in the mainstream media. It's reached a point now in this country where "gay rights" have become almost a "third rail issue." No way should anyone who dissents from the "politically correct" view on these issues provide a reasonable or cogent argument in opposition to the "heterophobes" arguments lest we either end up on the backpages or included only because our views demonstrate our inherently backwards, bigotted and "behind the times" views, which directly confirm the argument that the "heterophobes" are making.

I was watching some program the other night and it featured a Roman Catholic nun who recently published a book on the root causes of the current "pedophile" scandal in the chuch. The interviewer asked her whether homosexuality may have something to do with the scandal. Her response was not really. When the interviewer mentioned that over eighty percent of the incidents were between priests and teenage boys, her response was oh yes but these were dysfunctional homosexuals.

It's reached a point in this country where one can no longer call a spade a spade without modifying one's response in order to force adherence to the "politically correct" view.

Ain't it the truth?! But how the heck can it be that way, when the country is opposed, 2-1 to gay marriage. A clue sahowed up the other day, when an article said that Pres. Bush didn't want to alienate "moderates" -- it's those goddamned suburban moderates again, the same ones who support illegal immigration and affirmative action!

No way should anyone who dissents from the "politically correct" view on these issues provide a reasonable or cogent argument in opposition to the "heterophobes" arguments lest we either end up on the backpages or included only because our views demonstrate our inherently backwards, bigotted and "behind the times" views, which directly confirm the argument that the "heterophobes" are making.

"Dysfunctional homosexuals." I love it! Whether or not the sister is homosexual, she is definitely part of the radical movement that has infiltrated the RC Church over the past 30 years, and whose members bear the greatest responsibility for the pedophilia scandal.

It's reached a point in this country where one can no longer call a spade a spade without modifying one's response in order to force adherence to the "politically correct" view.

Yup. And by the time you're done "modifying" your view, you ain't got no view left you can call your own. Remember, a half truth is a whole lie.

found this following a link out of a FR topic:

RealClearPolitics 'blog
J. McIntyre
Friday, February 27 2004
MORE GAY MARRIAGE: Al Sharpton from last night'sDemocratic debate:
I think this is not an issue any more of just marriage. This is an issue of human rights. And I think it is dangerous to give states the right to deal with human rights questions. That's how we ended up with slavery and segregation going forward a long time.

I, under no circumstances, believe we ought to give states rights to gay and lesbians' human rights. Whatever my personal feelings may be about gay and lesbian marriages, unless you are prepared to say gays and lesbians are not human beings, they should have the same constitutional right of any other human being.
When I heard this it occurred to me that for those who believe that gay marriage is an issue about fundamental fairness and equality of the law, this is really the only intellectually sound position. If this issue is truly analogous to the old laws which barred interracial marriage in many states (a common arguing point for the pro-gay marriage side) then Sharpton is exactly right that leaving this to the states would be immoral and wrong.

Does anyone think for one second that this countrytoday would stand for the argument that it is OK for Virginia or Alabama to pass laws barring interracial marriage? Of course not.

So if gay marriage is fundamentally about basic civil rights for all citizens in this country, then I don't see how gay marriage proponents can honestly argue for a "states-rights" system that would legally discriminate against individuals in some states.

FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT:

I understand the reticence to alter the Constitution, and I myself am unsure whether I would support the FMA. But it is disingenuous for Senator Kerry to say he is against gay marriage and that the issue should be left up to the states.

Given what is happening in the real world in Massachusetts and San Francisco, and given the Supreme Court's decision on sodomy earlier this year and the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution, the reality is that if you are truly against gay marriage and you want the laws of the nation to reflect that opposition, the only viable option is probably an amendment to the Constitution.

So where do you stand? If you think this is an issue of basic human equality then Sharpton is right and a "states-rights" position is morally wrong. If you are against gay marriage and want the laws to reflect that position then you are going to have to face the uncomfortable truth that a Constitutional amendment might be the only way to make that a reality.

A simple question to someone who is supposedly against gay marriage would be:
"Would you support an amendment to the Constitution enshrining marriage as between one man and one woman if that was the ONLY way to legally preserve the sanctity of marriage. Yes or No?"
If the answer is "no" then it doesn't seem to me from a public policy standpoint that that person is against gay marriage.

Homosexual Agenda Ping - lots to chew on here.

One main point - the media are bought out whores of the "gay" rights movement. No doubt about it.

What can we do?

1. Become educated ourselves, and not fall for the lying propaganda permeating the airwaves, print media, TV and government and other institutions. There is no better place than FR and this website:

http://www.abidingtruth.com/index.php?viewmode=resources

2. Do our best to educate others - our children, family, fellow employees or workers, co-religionists, neighbors,the public - through any means we can come up with. Some ideas here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1076476/posts
What We Can Do To Defeat the Homosexual Agenda

3. Contact all elected representatives over and over again. Can't give up on this one, even though it seems useless at times.

4. Assist others who are on the front lines - give our support, whatever we can afford in time, money or other assets, to organizations or individuals, including right-minded people in or seeking public office that are fighting the culture war.

5. Pray.

6. Put other ideas on the above thread.

"If it weren’t for that grand old scourge of the socialist media, Accuracy in Media founder Reed Irvine, we wouldn’t know, that according to New York Timesman Richard Berke (who is now the paper’s Washington editor), 75 percent of the top honchos at the Times on the editorial side were gay … and that was in 2000!"

Seventy five percent gay? You don't suppose there's any discrimination in hiring going on here do you? Naw, can't be. Just like there's no discrimination in hiring college professors even though they're ninety percent Democrats (read Marxist/Socialist). Where's the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission when you really need them. Apparently nowhere to be found. What a surprise.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.